Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

psypost.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 291 posts

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#281

Post by Manuel_D »

wiether wrote: post #270
Manuel_D wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While it should in theory be no problem that a workplace is 90% men and 10% women because they live in a platonic ideal where they've been free to attain to their true ambition that is influenced by biological traits related to sex, in reality, once one gender gains enough dominance in a field or workplace, sexual discrimination, harassment, and gatekeeping end up deepening the imbalance. The assumption that an ind…

Why focusing on hiring? The comment you're answering to is talking about harassment and gatekeeping. Hiring is one gate, but if you're hired just to reach gender goals or to satisfy the lust of your new manager, you will not have the same experience at the company than someone from the other gender. Like getting raises or being promoted. Things are complicated.

How do we quantify "discrimination and gatekeeping"? Focusing on hiring makes sense because it's the gate that you need to pass through to join the company. It's by far the most important form of gatekeeping, and the one with the most influence over the representation of the company. It's also where I see the most focus on attempting to "fix" the imbalance, but introducing policies to favor underrepresented groups. I've worked at multiple companies with overt affirmative action programs in favor of women.

Other factors like harassment are important, but again the evidence doesn't seem to suggest it's responsible for gender imbalances. Engineering has one of the lower rates of harassment among professional industries (32%) less than plenty of industries with more balanced gender representation like healthcare (35%) and media (41%) [1]. And this is just among white-collar industries, service industries and blue collar industries are by far even worse [2].

1. https://variety.com/2018/biz/news/media-industry-sexual-hara...

2. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/11/21/16685942/sexual-ha...

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#282

Post by lenkite »

torstenvl wrote: post #225
wreath wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> boys-club culture Do you have examples of these practices?

I do. High-stress high-stakes careers dealing in the macabre tend to result in dark/inappropriate senses of humor as a coping/bonding mechanism. Although not predictive on an individual level, the (perceived?) general trend is that men are more accepting of that kind of environment than women are. I've seen people make the argument that a woman shouldn't lead an infantry platoon because it would prevent grunts from c…

Why is it that the US military has different physical fitness standards for men and women ? Shouldn't standards be gender neutral ?

Men must complete a three-mile run within 18 minutes to get a maximum score on that portion of the PFT, while women younger than 40 have up to 21 minutes.

For Marines between 17 and 20 years old, men must do 20 pullups to get a maximum score; women must do seven.

On the CFT, men must lift a 30-pound ammunition can between 106 and 120 times within two minutes to get a max score. Women must lift the can between 66 and 75 times for a maximum score.

If the standards are un-equal discrimination is natural.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#283

Post by Chris2048 »

ZGDUwpqEWpUZ wrote: post #163
Chris2048 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone who says otherwise is part of the problem and should have no voice in this conversation. This is the same intolerant gatekeeping that I loathe in the feminist camp. Everyone has a voice, anyone can participate, no one-person gets to define "the" problem, let alone label/dehumanize people as being problems.

> no one-person gets to define "the" problem Well of course, this is not a dictatorship and I'm not a dictator. I'm stating my opinion on a forum. In the same way flat-Earthers have no place teaching astronomy, someone who believes the pay gap is women getting paid less for the same work has no place teaching sociology. That is intolerant, but so it should be. Gatekeeping is inevitable and necessary, the problem is t…

But fields of science/academia have factual authority that a random persons' opinion does not.

The "conversation", which I assume to be the societal conversation i.e. marketplace of ideas is explicitly a free, and public one.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#284

Post by Ajedi32 »

obelos wrote: post #194
MadeThisToReply wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It all starts with the dubious (to say the least) premise that men and women are exactly the same. Both sexes on average want the same things, like the same things, are interested in the same things, and have the same priorities and proclivities. Therefore, in a just world, we'd see an exact 50/50 ratio of men and women in every possible occupation, because there are no differences between men and women, therefore th…

There are some extreme but isolated examples of people who are disposed to this opinion, but more commonly the objection to fields being dominated by one gender or the other is because those workplaces, as this study points out, can't seem to stop themselves from discriminating and gatekeeping against those of the other gender. While it should in theory be no problem that a workplace is 90% men and 10% women because…

I'll concede this probably does happen to varying extents in some (but not all) workplaces. But since it seems we're in agreement that it isn't the only factor at play, I'm sure you can see why using unequal outcomes as the sole evidence of discrimination in any specific workplace or industry is flawed.

Furthermore, I would argue that even in cases where discrimination is actually occurring, "stop acting in a sexually discriminating way because you're impeding someone's will" can be the only just solution to the problem. The alternative of actively and intentionally discriminating against other people in the majority group who did nothing wrong is unacceptable, both because it does nothing to address the root of the problem, and because discrimination on the basis of irrelevant factors like sex is wrong regardless of who the target of that discrimination is.

What's worse is when people use unequal outcomes as the sole justification for actively discriminating against majority groups, because now not only are you perpetrating these injustices in the pursuit of an ideal percentage of men and woman in the industry, but you're also running the risk of being wrong about what that ideal percentage is in the first place, actively pushing men and women into roles they wouldn't naturally choose in an ideal world where unjust discrimination didn't exist.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#285

Post by catskul2 »

treeman79 wrote: post #157
BitwiseFool wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"they looked at hiring practices. That's an extremely narrow view of the problem domain." While true, the hiring process itself has an outsized influence on the problem domain because everything else depends on it. If you discriminate during the hiring stage you can confidently assert you aren't discriminating elsewhere by sheer merit of not having hired the kinds of people you are charged with discriminating agains…

I found out after the fact that I was reluctantly hired, only with great stress because I was a white male of unspecified sexuality. They complained several times about being forced to hire me because they were in desperate need of a qualified individual. They were in deep technical trouble from over a dozen incompetent ones with one or more the “correct” checkboxes. I cleaned up the mess they had made. Then promptly…

Which industry? (and which geographic area?)

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#286

Post by torstenvl »

lenkite wrote: post #282
torstenvl wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do. High-stress high-stakes careers dealing in the macabre tend to result in dark/inappropriate senses of humor as a coping/bonding mechanism. Although not predictive on an individual level, the (perceived?) general trend is that men are more accepting of that kind of environment than women are. I've seen people make the argument that a woman shouldn't lead an infantry platoon because it would prevent grunts from c…

Why is it that the US military has different physical fitness standards for men and women ? Shouldn't standards be gender neutral ? Men must complete a three-mile run within 18 minutes to get a maximum score on that portion of the PFT, while women younger than 40 have up to 21 minutes. For Marines between 17 and 20 years old, men must do 20 pullups to get a maximum score; women must do seven. On the CFT, men must lif…

While the situation is, in my view, less than ideal, the decisions behind it are not decisions I am at liberty to criticize publicly.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#287

Post by Shocka1 »

lenkite wrote: post #282
torstenvl wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do. High-stress high-stakes careers dealing in the macabre tend to result in dark/inappropriate senses of humor as a coping/bonding mechanism. Although not predictive on an individual level, the (perceived?) general trend is that men are more accepting of that kind of environment than women are. I've seen people make the argument that a woman shouldn't lead an infantry platoon because it would prevent grunts from c…

Why is it that the US military has different physical fitness standards for men and women ? Shouldn't standards be gender neutral ? Men must complete a three-mile run within 18 minutes to get a maximum score on that portion of the PFT, while women younger than 40 have up to 21 minutes. For Marines between 17 and 20 years old, men must do 20 pullups to get a maximum score; women must do seven. On the CFT, men must lif…

> Men must complete a three-mile run within 18 minutes to get a maximum score on that portion of the PFT, while women younger than 40 have up to 21 minutes.

Former active duty Marine here. I'm on your side in this 100% for several reasons I won't go into, but the 18 and 21 minutes you stated is off by quite a bit. It's roughly 28 (male) and 32 minutes (female) for 3 miles - it may have changed by a minute or two since I've been out. This still aligns with the basic premise of your statement.

For reference, 3 miles at 18 or sub-18 minutes is getting to an elite level of running, while low to mid 20's is average.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#288

Post by groby_b »

laurent92 wrote: post #261
groby_b wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did it occur to you that a better alternative is to provide a safety net for both men and women, instead of taking the response "if i can't have it, you can't either"? Engaging in a race to the bottom, ensuring everybody is equally bad off, is maybe not the best strategy to ensure equal treatment. (yes, it works. It's just not very productive)

Yes. What if neither is possible? - People do not want to provide this safety net for men, - People psychologically resist to remove it from women. Equality is not possible.

"do not want" isn't "isn't possible". It takes work to effect that change, but it isn't impossible.

As for the second statement: Removing a safety net from somebody else for equality's sake is the equivalent of a three year old smashing their toy so their brother can't play with it either. Yep, equal outcome is guaranteed now, but there's a more adult way to handle it.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#289

Post by dktoao »

b9a2cab5 wrote: post #244
dktoao wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Engineering is critical, going to a top engineering school is not Totally agree, I would even go further and say that I think the "top tier" engineering schools are not better (actually I would argue worse because brilliant researchers aren't always brilliant teachers), they just are able to be a lot more selective with the people that they admit and that is probably the biggest factor on why they are perceived as…

I literally just said that you cannot label the cultural contributions of a group of people with the same skin color as a single unit and you go ahead and dismiss all that because you've "lived and traveled in many parts of Asia". > stark economic correlation This is completely unrelated to peoples' culture, which you claimed would become a monoculture if schools were majority Asian. If you want to be "conscious of t…

> People like you are the problem

Really adds some credence to your “I’m not a racist, you’re a racist!” Argument /s

That’s actually a fantastic article, it outlines pretty well the hypocrisy of the left. You may find that there are some of us on the left that are trying to call out this bullshit too.

Re: Swedish study finds discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations

#290

Post by obelos »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #284
obelos wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some extreme but isolated examples of people who are disposed to this opinion, but more commonly the objection to fields being dominated by one gender or the other is because those workplaces, as this study points out, can't seem to stop themselves from discriminating and gatekeeping against those of the other gender. While it should in theory be no problem that a workplace is 90% men and 10% women because…

I'll concede this probably does happen to varying extents in some (but not all) workplaces. But since it seems we're in agreement that it isn't the only factor at play, I'm sure you can see why using unequal outcomes as the sole evidence of discrimination in any specific workplace or industry is flawed. Furthermore, I would argue that even in cases where discrimination is actually occurring, "stop acting in a sexuall…

“Stop discriminating,” by itself frequently doesn't cut it, though. And when it doesn't, playing to the numbers is another tool to use to attempt to reach a just equilibrium. It gives the minority gender a means of establishing networks of power, gaining positions of authority that can shift the culture and reduce the gatekeeping. While it may be true that deliberately aiming for a ratio stands the chance of disenfranchising some qualified people, the existing situation quite possibly does the same but we don't know it. Survivorship bias and default bias make it very difficult to discern whether the existing ratio is appropriately reflective of the population's nature.

I understand the point you're making that ratio targeting seems immune to indications that a different natural ratio exists that differs from the imposed one, but I argue there is sensitivity to negative feedback. If there really is a natural sample ratio that differs materially from that found in the broader population, businesses will eventually be unable to hire according to the ratio. The danger is of course setting up a system that's wholly immune to that possibility and risk coming to lay upon a Procrustean bed. But I think profit motive is sufficient to dampen that risk. Businesses who are simply unable to find and hire qualified candidates who fulfill their target ratio will abandon that ratio by degrees.

Post reply on HN